sec should had written "The American" instead of AAC, to avoid confusion with the other conference that shares the same abbreviation from the NAIA.

Appreciate that, ncaanopaawaa, you're a positive poster. It's such a broadly used word/term, even just in sports, it can be easy for someone at times to make typos on acronyms when concentration/proofing is not at a peak level. While the conference (AAC) wanted to generate an encompassing name, the prime term is way too common. I suppose they could not find something a bit more unique.

@sec03 - Thanks for the compliment about me being a positive poster. That's why I love being in these forums because I love having interests related with conference alignments/histories/analyses and stuff. But what I'm curious about is what would lead to when the 2013-14 season starts for both the new Big East and The American (AAC). Maybe some of the southern members would impress those of the Big 12, who'll know?

Bowlsby, Swofford, etc. are all onboard with this super-division idea. The question of player stipends will serve as the catalyst for the latest push. It is going to happen, sooner than later. A lot of questions to resolve, particularly as it relates to basketball, and other olympic sports whereby the 5 power conferences don't have such a product monopoly.

The AAU, Sunbelt, MAC, CUSA, and MWC are going to feel more pain. Particularly the AAC and MWC shall be feeders to the 5 major ones if further expansion with the top conferences occurs. Assuming each of the 5 power conferences could try to reach 16 or so (hypothetically, of course), there would a near maximum, at best, of 15 schools that could be candidates for transition into the upper group. Doubt the elite shall be much open to upward mobility though. It could be more about getting the minimum needed to continue hanging well among the elite.

If the top 5 want to exclude more dipping, and shift among themselves more, then they will have to break the GoRs. Try to solve a mess, and create a new one. And any of the 5 lower conferences trying to rise as a group to the upper chamber, would seem to be an unrealistic endeavor, particular if a few of their better schools escape.Those 5 lower FBS conferences shall end up being more like the current FCS, if lucky, with the less money.

The B12 may ultimately be the most prone to pick into the AAC and MWC because of being only ten members right now, and having a CCG may end up being a near must in the new set-up.

Its going to hold at the current configuration for at least the next 10 years...with the only exceptions being the ACC possibly adding 1 or 2 (NDfb, Navy fb, UConn, Cincy, Temple) and the Big 12 possibly adding two (Cincy, Memphis, Tulane, BYUfb, BSUfb, Rice/Houston).

I'd put money on contraction by expansion, the Big 12 is the likely target with the three 100% safe conference surrounding them to the North, East and West but I think other than UT/OU/KU the ACC has far more attractive candidates for the BigTen and SEC.

Odds are one of the conferences will be downgraded (won't die like the WAC but will become another version of the Big East/AAC) and either Iowa St/Baylor/K State/TCU or Wake/BC/Miami/Syracuse won't make it in the next configuration (my bet is on those lesser Big 12 schools getting cut as they're less valuable than nearly any ACC school but Wake Forest).

_________________Fan of the Big 12 Conference, the Mountain West Conference and...

Weren't the only things preventing that from happening were that Texas wanted to keep the LHN and Baylor was threatening a lawsuit?

So many different things were reported/rumored to have steered it into the ground, but it was the PAC that ultimately walked away from the table. So it wasn't worth it for them. Whatever additional revenue could come by way of those four schools (or the combo of OU-OSU the next round), the Big XII schools' demands were far too steep.

tkalmus wrote:

Its going to hold at the current configuration for at least the next 10 years...with the only exceptions being the ACC possibly adding 1 or 2 (NDfb, Navy fb, UConn, Cincy, Temple) and the Big 12 possibly adding two (Cincy, Memphis, Tulane, BYUfb, BSUfb, Rice/Houston).

I can't help but wonder if there's more work going on in the PAC. The B1G claimed its expansion had to do with B1G-PAC falling through, and I doubt the PAC stands fully motionless on just Colorado and Utah.

I think that if there is any major conference shifting among the SEC and Big Ten (i.e. poaching the ACC) it is going to force the Pac 12 to come to terms with Texas and Oklahoma. There simply isnt anyone else with the right geography for the Pac 12 to consider. Letting Texas put their Tier 3 rights in their own network might have been a bargain price.

I think that if there is any major conference shifting among the SEC and Big Ten (i.e. poaching the ACC) it is going to force the Pac 12 to come to terms with Texas and Oklahoma. There simply isnt anyone else with the right geography for the Pac 12 to consider. Letting Texas put their Tier 3 rights in their own network might have been a bargain price.

While noone other than Texas would like that, if the PAC12 network becomes as successful as the LHN, or ESPN chooses not to renew it, then Texas would obviously throw their 3rd party rights into the P12N in a heartbeat.

Still with Arizona, ASU, Utah, and Colorado all voting no (because they want to stay in a division with LA), and USC/UCLA holding grudge (they wanted to keep their 3rd party rights), and Standford still not crazy about UT's oly sports (which are really good) joining the conference...I don't think it would happen unless we see a major shift in the SEC/B1G expansion policy (i.e going to 18-20, at this point 16 won't be radical enough to rock the boat).

_________________Fan of the Big 12 Conference, the Mountain West Conference and...

I think that if there is any major conference shifting among the SEC and Big Ten (i.e. poaching the ACC) it is going to force the Pac 12 to come to terms with Texas and Oklahoma. There simply isnt anyone else with the right geography for the Pac 12 to consider. Letting Texas put their Tier 3 rights in their own network might have been a bargain price.

I still think there's room to ensure no further competition in the region. New Mexico, while not a large state, is a sizable institution that pushes the conference eastward. Colorado State pretty much ties up the mountains with Boulder and UU. And I think the two Kansas schools could be more attractive than people give them credit.

And...I know I play this card a lot, but there's Rice. Hey, it puts the PAC into Texas' largest market.

Does anybody think it is possible for Texas and OU to go the separate ways in conference realignment? Hypothetically speaking, could OU and maybe OSU end up going to the SEC and Texas and Texas Tech end up in the PAC 12? (all of this is in the event the GOR is dissolved).I just can't see OU in the Pac 12. Financially, IMO, it would be better for OU to be in the SEC than the Pac 12. I also think it would be better for student athletes flying back from the east coast than it would be flying back from the west coast.

On a side note, I love coming to this forum. Though I may not always agree with what some of you say, the posters on this website are really insightful. sec 03, bishon cutter, tkalmsu, fighting muskie and some of the other posters on here, its like reading The Republic, only for college football junkies. Especially when you compare it to other websites. I'm not trying to brown nose or anything, but it is refreshing to come here and read what you guys think.

On a side note, I love coming to this forum. Though I may not always agree with what some of you say, the posters on this website are really insightful. sec 03, bishon cutter, tkalmsu, fighting muskie and some of the other posters on here, its like reading The Republic, only for college football junkies. Especially when you compare it to other websites. I'm not trying to brown nose or anything, but it is refreshing to come here and read what you guys think.

hendu1976fl, your cordial comments are appreciated. Welcome, and thanks for your questions and thoughts. You know, there can be snippet moments with those longhorn, nittany lion (& me not all disconnected from), and Muskingum fans .

Does anybody think it is possible for Texas and OU to go the separate ways in conference realignment? Hypothetically speaking, could OU and maybe OSU end up going to the SEC and Texas and Texas Tech end up in the PAC 12? (all of this is in the event the GOR is dissolved).I just can't see OU in the Pac 12. Financially, IMO, it would be better for OU to be in the SEC than the Pac 12. I also think it would be better for student athletes flying back from the east coast than it would be flying back from the west coast.

Separate conference-wise? Sure...they were separated for years. It's only the RRR that keeps them together. That's what can't be sacrificed.

Granted, I never thought the Longhorns would let TAMU walk the way they did without keeping that game, so I do wonder if there could be a layoff in the RRR should that split ever occur. I think it would be very likely to be placed on pause were any of them to go to the Big Ten. The B1G conference schedule pretty much rules out RRR where it currently sits on the calendar.

Thanks for the good thoughts, too! This board is great. I appear and lurk on several, but this is by far my favorite.

I also appreciate the kind remarks and I concur with my colleagues on this issue---I think it's very likely that they move together but nothing in conference realignment is ever guaranteed.

That's what happens when the conference realignment took over everything. The Big 12 no longer has a CCG, the WAC no longer sponsors football, the Big TEN and the Pac-12 now have CCG's, even the ACC, Big TEN and SEC plan to be "super-conferences" with over 12+ members. I say that the maximum number for conferences in any level should be either 12 or 14.

Does anybody think it is possible for Texas and OU to go the separate ways in conference realignment? Hypothetically speaking, could OU and maybe OSU end up going to the SEC and Texas and Texas Tech end up in the PAC 12? (all of this is in the event the GOR is dissolved).I just can't see OU in the Pac 12. Financially, IMO, it would be better for OU to be in the SEC than the Pac 12. I also think it would be better for student athletes flying back from the east coast than it would be flying back from the west coast.

Separate conference-wise? Sure...they were separated for years. It's only the RRR that keeps them together. That's what can't be sacrificed.

Granted, I never thought the Longhorns would let TAMU walk the way they did without keeping that game, so I do wonder if there could be a layoff in the RRR should that split ever occur. I think it would be very likely to be placed on pause were any of them to go to the Big Ten. The B1G conference schedule pretty much rules out RRR where it currently sits on the calendar.

Thanks for the good thoughts, too! This board is great. I appear and lurk on several, but this is by far my favorite.

The RRR will not move because Texas and OU sell those tickets as a separate event every year (not included in the season ticket price) and require more donation from their fans (like me) in order to get them. Forbes said a few years ago that the RRR was the most profitable annually scheduled game in college football because of the money it pays out to both of these schools. So while it may not be considered the #1 rivalry nationaly, it is #1 in profitability which greedy Texas won't let go without a fight.

I could see a scernario where OU leaves Texas but its highly unlikely as they can't leave OSU behind none of the Big 3 wants them with their tag-a-long (can't qualify academically for B1G, not good enough for SEC, and PAC12 flat out said no). But the game will always stay during fair weekend, that's a major part of the tradition.

_________________Fan of the Big 12 Conference, the Mountain West Conference and...

While I wouldn't care if the RRR was broken up, I don't see it happening especially if Texas finds itself in the PAC. I say specifically the PAC because, with a 9-game conference schedule, if Texas had OU every year they would only have 2 OOC games to schedule. Colorado had CSU and Utah has Utah St or BYU (or both) every year. None of the PAC teams are tied down to 1 specific rivalry. I couldn't see the PAC growing with Texas without OU. The PAC with Texas, OU, Tx Tech, and Okie St would be solid additions. None of those four would be the bottom of the PAC barrel right now.

If Texas was invited to the SEC, which is couldn't fathom, the SEC would invite OU to make an even 16. Any discussions regarding Tx Tech or Okie St would be null and void to the SEC.

As far as the B1G, I wouldn't think Texas would touch them without a regional counterpart. But OU? I'm not so sure. They aren't AAU. Disregard that Nebraska isn't, because they were when they joined the B1G. However, I could see (even though its a stretch) the B1G expanding their contiguous footprint with invites to Kansas, OU, Texas, and...I'm not sure. This would all depend on if another XII team went AAU (I know Iowa St is, but the B1G doesn't want repetitive footprint members...also, Iowa St brings extremely little to the athletic front) and/or all the AAU ACC members and all the AAU SEC members choose to not leave their respective conferences.

Then there's the ACC. They are already at 14 football members plus Notre Dame (which doesn't count football-wise). Furthest west? Louisville. Texas has the money to not worry about the travel and exposure in Florida, Pennsylvania, North Carolina, and the New England region would benefit Texas. I can't see any scenario involving the ACC that would make OU jump for joy. The RRR would die as an in-conference game.

As far as possibilities go to maintain the RRR: I would think 1) PAC, 2) B1G, 3) SEC

And for fun:

PAC-16 (because current PAC-12 members complain about adding schools to east which would result in losing annual games in California, pods would be used)CCG: top two pods winners by conference record - in case of tie: head to head, common opponents, etc.Scheduling: Play other 3 teams in division/pod and 2 from each of other pods. 3 OOC games. Meet every team every other year. See every stadium every 4 years.- Red River: Texas, Oklahoma, Texas Tech, Oklahoma St- Four Corners: Arizona, Arizona St, Colorado, Utah- California: USC, UCLA, California, Stanford- Pacific NW: Washington, Washington St, Oregon, Oregon St

When the lad, I remember those great Darrell Royal (Texas) and Frank Browles (Arkansas) battles. The '69? Cotton Bowl game with Notre Dame who dropped their stance on appearing in bowls, where LSU got slighted & went nowhere that year (LSU declined the 2nd Peach Bowl whereby WVU went instead & won against So. Carolina who had won their first and only ACC Championship). Nixon declared Texas national champions that year, while Penn State went undefeated. That was awesome college fb time and the controversies made all more interesting.

With Arkansas leaving the Texas schedule, and later Nebraska, Colorado, Mizzou, and particularly Texas A&M leaving the B12, the RRR seems the one remaining and close, bigtime, and regular rivalry event. Games vs TTU, TCU, Baylor, Okie State, etc., can be good and competitive, but just not the same passions that get tested.

Not to imply Texas cannot be successful and formidable without those old-time games, but a lot has been lost with some great traditions. Even Oklahoma has lost. Those old Big Eight Oklahoma-Nebraska games (Switzer, Osborne) were great TV when both were highly ranked. Mizzou-Kansas & Mizzou-OU, more lost rivalries that impact all of the Big12.

I can understand tier rights efforts, independent networks, and so forth. But gezz Texas, don't sacrifice the really good stuff that built your notable enterprise. I can see why if Texas left the B12 they would want to take certain "tag-alongs" with them, but if there is no "Oklahoma" in the mix, it's less appealing. If Texas leaves or Oklahoma leaves the B12, they both leave. It could be to the same destination, or it could be separate directions and conferences. Those 30-something agency consultants for big networks and advertisers will tell 'em alot about population demographics, but could be clueless about some beloved and heated traditions.

BePcr07--All three of those are very plausible scenarios for the Longhorns and Sooners. As I Midwesterner, I'd like to see them go the Big Ten route but instead of Kansas St I would really like to see Missouri get that spot instead. I think they are a better institutional fit with the Big Ten and it would restore their rivalries with Nebraska and Kansas.

From a Big Ten perspective I would much rather have the cream of the Big 12 than ACC schools in heavily populated states that have been traditionally weak in football.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forumYou cannot edit your posts in this forumYou cannot delete your posts in this forumYou cannot post attachments in this forum